[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
On Thu, 2002-07-18 at 00:39, bob mcwhirter wrote:
> > Finally a word to say that even though the preceding-sibling is a
> > "reverse" axis, a copy-of or apply-templates on "preceding-sibling::*"
> > would take the nodes by document order: the "reverse order" property
> > only affects the position -as returned by the "position()" function- of
> > the nodes, not their physical position in the node set...
>
> Though, unless otherwise specified (ie, in c14n), a node set is indeed
> a -set-, with no particular order implied.
Reminds me of long threads, elsewhere,... we could argue that node sets
are not -sets- in the sense that they have an order: if I affect
"preceding-sibling::*" to a variable "var", then I can ask for $var[1]
which would have no meaning if this was a -set- and the order used to
evaluate $var[1] is the forward order even though the node set has been
constructed using an axis with a reverse order.
Eric
--
See you in San Diego.
http://conferences.oreillynet.com/os2002/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric van der Vlist http://xmlfr.org http://dyomedea.com
(W3C) XML Schema ISBN:0-596-00252-1 http://oreilly.com/catalog/xmlschema
------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
